Re: Richard Quine
Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 5:45 pm
Seen about ten of Quine's films, found them all interesting enough to watch more than once. Never met a single person - male, female, old, young - who didn't like Bell, Book & Candle.
But the one I find most interesting is Strangers When We Meet. Makes a potent double-feature with the also undervalued No Down Payment. Both explore the transitional aspects of the post-WWII economy/real estate/nuclear family milieu to great, sometimes troubling effect, though they do so in tellingly different ways. There's a kind of dreamy undertow in both films... the suburbs used to be a place where honest working class people could afford to live peacefully, aspirationally, and we can see and experience that, generations later and bittersweetly, in both films. But there are elements of unease - a few too many drinks, unfaithful husbands, bored wives, PTSD, hyper kids, etc. - without resorting to the moronic simplicity of the last thirty years of post-Sundance "SUBURBS = BAD" finger wagging.
NDP has, I think, the better cast (one of the best ensemble casts of the 1950s -- especially the women) and the better script. But it's more conservative; as handsomely well-made as it is, it could still work as television drama or even a stage play. SWWM on the other hand compares to Antonioni or Michael Mann's use of architecture and space to express its themes (sometimes almost too literally). Like those later films, the characters in Quine's movie often seem lost or overwhelmed by their built surroundings. This risks being overly schematic, but Quine balances the emotion and ideas in a way that is just as affecting as Ritt's more traditional work. I Love them both.
Now, who owns Strangers When We Meet and why isn't it on Blu-ray?
But the one I find most interesting is Strangers When We Meet. Makes a potent double-feature with the also undervalued No Down Payment. Both explore the transitional aspects of the post-WWII economy/real estate/nuclear family milieu to great, sometimes troubling effect, though they do so in tellingly different ways. There's a kind of dreamy undertow in both films... the suburbs used to be a place where honest working class people could afford to live peacefully, aspirationally, and we can see and experience that, generations later and bittersweetly, in both films. But there are elements of unease - a few too many drinks, unfaithful husbands, bored wives, PTSD, hyper kids, etc. - without resorting to the moronic simplicity of the last thirty years of post-Sundance "SUBURBS = BAD" finger wagging.
NDP has, I think, the better cast (one of the best ensemble casts of the 1950s -- especially the women) and the better script. But it's more conservative; as handsomely well-made as it is, it could still work as television drama or even a stage play. SWWM on the other hand compares to Antonioni or Michael Mann's use of architecture and space to express its themes (sometimes almost too literally). Like those later films, the characters in Quine's movie often seem lost or overwhelmed by their built surroundings. This risks being overly schematic, but Quine balances the emotion and ideas in a way that is just as affecting as Ritt's more traditional work. I Love them both.
Now, who owns Strangers When We Meet and why isn't it on Blu-ray?